ITEM CMDT4
CABINET MEMBER FOR TRANSPORT – 23 APRIL 2009
OXFORD: PROPOSED 20 MPH SPEED LIMITS
Report by Head of Transport
Introduction
1. On 17 July the Cabinet Member for Transport approved consultation on proposals to introduce 20mph speed limits on the majority of residential roads in Oxford (and the adjacent area of North Hinksey/Botley) as well as on city centre roads, in suburban shopping areas and on sections of more major routes (Annex 1) (download as .doc file).
2. The proposals recognise that 20mph speed limits can contribute to Local Transport Plan (LTP) objectives and wider Council and community objectives including:
· Improved road safety by reducing the number and severity of accidents · Encouraging the use of walking and cycling with benefits including reduced congestion, lower carbon and other vehicle emissions as well as wider health benefits such as reducing obesity. · Meeting Council Corporate Plan objectives, for example on providing stronger and safer communities.
3. The emphasis at informal consultation was firmly on ascertaining whether the proposals were welcomed in principle and this was confirmed with almost 2/3 of respondents supportive. Formal consultation stressed that with acceptance of the scheme in principle the next stage was to seek comments on the detail such as which minor roads should be included and on which sections of more major roads lower limits should apply. Despite this emphasis very few responses recognised it and most mirrored informal consultation in expressing comments on the general principle.
Responses to Informal Consultation
4. A comprehensive informal consultation was carried out in September and October 2008. This revealed much support with approximately 61% of 574 responses received within the consultation period in favour (Annex 2) (download as .doc file). In recognition of North Hinksey and Botley communities not giving majority support for extending 20 mph limits into their regions the formal consultation proposals were amended with this omission emphasised to ensure residents were aware of the changes. Amended proposals were formally advertised in February 2009.
Responses to Formal Consultation
5. While far fewer responses (146) were received compared to the informal stage 69% supported the proposals.
6. Responses to the formal consultation (2 February to 6 March 2009) are summarised at Annex 3 (download as .xls file) which includes responses received after the closing date as far as these could be accommodated.
7. Comments by those not supportive mainly related to the following concerns:
· cost / cost effectiveness · increased vehicle emissions · increased sign clutter · adverse impact on bus services due to longer journey times
Responses to these concerns are set out below:
8. Cost/cost effectiveness – the estimated works cost of implementing the scheme as advertised is approximately £233,000; additional costs for supporting measures and on-going maintenance will be incurred and estimates for these are given later in this report (see paragraphs 25-27).
9. It is expected that over time a 20mph limit would result in a reduction in speeds and accidents and encourage increased walking and cycling, especially when integrated with the many other projects planned to deliver local transport objectives within Oxford.
10. Nevertheless it is recognised that, in the short term, any such changes are unlikely to be substantial. However on safety grounds alone even a relatively small percentage reduction in accidents (of say between 5% and 10%) would provide worthwhile benefits when evaluating the scheme using standard cost benefit methods for road safety projects given that around 200 accidents are reported each year in the roads included in the proposals.
11. Vehicle emissions – optimum efficiency and minimum pollutant emissions are typically obtained when vehicle speeds are in the region of 40 to 50mph. While pollution levels rise sharply at very low speeds (below 10-15mph) there is comparatively little difference in emission levels between a vehicle travelling at 20 or 30mph.
12. Existing average speeds on the majority of roads included in the proposals are typically already in the region of 20 to 24mph, and so the actual level of additional emissions – which would come from those vehicles which are currently travelling substantially faster than this average – would be relatively modest. It is hoped that over time greater use of walking and cycling in place of the use of private cars for shorter journeys in particular would substantially offset any increase in emissions.
13. Sign clutter – the project will unavoidably require additional (repeater) signing, but this will be mitigated as far as possible by using existing poles and lamp columns. Most of the terminal signs will however require new poles to be provided.
14. Impact on bus services – the proposals are primarily for residential roads and only a very limited proportion of the radial roads are included which are where bus services are generally operating.
Response of Thames Valley Police
15. The response of Thames Valley Police is set out at Annex 4 (download as .doc file). Their main concern is that without the widespread use of physical calming measures, compliance with a 20mph limit will be low, which not only will reduce the safety and wider benefits but also lead to demands for enforcement which could place a severe strain on police resources.
16. Although these concerns are noted, it is important to stress that the great majority of the roads included in the proposals are minor residential roads. Speed surveys have been carried out on a sample of these (it would be impractical to survey all of them) which show that average speeds are typically at or below 24mph, and therefore the Department for Transport guidance (Department for Transport Circular 1/2006 paragraph 82) is already likely to be met in such roads.
17. For those roads where average speeds are currently above 24mph, provision is made in the project to monitor speeds should the proposals be approved, and for supporting measures to be investigated and funded as appropriate. Feasibility studies have been commissioned for physical improvements in 3 locations on major routes where the current accident rate is high. Designs will reduce speeds and enhance the environment for vulnerable road-users by seeking a better balance between the needs of different users in a similar vein to the successful Cowley Road Mixed Priority measures.
18. Other supporting measures will be designed for locations where monitoring identifies significant non-compliance with the 20mph to help obtain the maximum benefit from any reduced limit. Such measures will possibly include some form of narrowing with priority given to roads with an accident history, and / or those which are important routes for pedestrians and cyclists, and in particular those well used by children (to support particular objectives in relation to child injuries and achieving greater use of walking and cycling for school journeys).
19. It is recognised that the police will not have resources to enforce the proposed limit and this has been stressed in both stages of consultation to help avoid unrealistic expectations. In practice, if approved, the introduction of the limit should result in very little change to the enforcement burden (and it is worth mentioning that there does not appear to be any significant demand from those areas already subject to a 20mph restriction).
Other Responses
20. All 6 City Council Area Committees support the proposals with 3 asking for more of the major roads to be included (Annex 5) (download as .pdf file).
21. Some of the responses, although supportive of the proposals, also requested that the 20mph limit be applied on all of the length of the radial routes, making the point that these roads – as the main arteries of movement into and out of the city and which typically had the highest numbers of accidents – were by definition those where it is most important to improve safety for cyclists and pedestrians.
22. Many of these routes have provision for cyclists (for example cycle lanes and tracks and, in some cases, parallel routes on quiet roads) and also a good standard of pedestrian crossing provision which have been provided to help mitigate these problems. While it is accepted that these are not always a full answer to the problems, the setting of speed limits inevitably requires balance between several competing objectives. Including significant lengths of such roads would not be in accordance with current County Council or Department for Transport advice.
Implementation
23. If the scheme is approved, the ordering of the work and noticing under the Traffic Management Act would take place as soon as the call-in period has expired, as it is proposed that the new limit would come into effect from the beginning of August and there is a lead-in time of 3 months required. As the scheme is extensive, poles would be erected over a period beforehand and signs then added or uncovered when the Order comes into force. The introduction of the limits would be accompanied by appropriate publicity and supporting activity such as deployment of the Council's Speed Indicator Device signs at key locations.
How the Proposal Supports LTP Objectives
24. In the medium term the scheme would support the core LTP objective of reducing casualties. In the longer term it would also improve accessibility and air quality as well as reducing congestion.
Financial and Staff Implications
25. The estimated cost for signing the proposed scheme is £233,000.
26. Additional costs will be incurred where supporting measures are identified as being required, both for their design and any consultation required, and then for implementation; it is difficult in advance of the limit being introduced (assuming it is approved) to estimate the overall costs, as only then will it be possible to identify where average speeds are judged to be sufficiently excessive as to require intervention. However, the types of measures envisaged (for example compact vehicle activated signs, limited use of additional road markings) would be lower cost both in terms of provision and maintenance; an initial cost of £75,000 is probably realistic.
27. On-going maintenance costs including the maintenance of the speed limit signs, supporting measures, and periodic updating of the speed limit order to reflect for example newly adopted streets – can only be estimated, but could amount to between £7500 and £15,000 per year.
28. In addition to the capital costs associated with physical measures, revenue-funded support would also be required, including an extensive publicity campaign on the introduction of the limit, (estimated cost of approximately £5000) and ongoing costs for monitoring the effectiveness of the scheme, and in particular speed surveys (these would be modest, unlikely to exceed £5000 over a three year period).
29. Works would be funded from within the capital and revenue programmes for 2009/10.
RECOMMENDATION
30. The Cabinet Member for Transport is RECOMMEDED to authorise implementation of the proposals as advertised at formal consultation.
STEVE HOWELL Head of Transport Environment & Economy
Background papers: Consultation Documentation
Contact Officer: Geoff Barrell Tel; 01865 810450
March 2009
|